5 ms·

> Best Buy doesn’t install anything on the PCs they sell. This isn't necessarily true. Some PCs are Best Buy specific models, with extra bloatware from Best Bu

> Best Buy doesn’t install anything on the PCs they sell. This isn't necessarily true. Some PCs are Best Buy specific models, with extra bloatware from Best Buy (in addition to the OEM bloatware from Dell / HP / Lenovo). This also affects physical components sometimes. I remember from laptop shopping a few months ago, that the MSI GS63 Stealth laptop ships with a crappier screen specifically for the Best Buy model, where as most other models had a decent screen. This was done so that the Best Buy model would have an artificially-low price in comparison to online retailers.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
AlexandrB 8y ago
Reading something like this I have two thoughts: 1. Why would PC manufacturers de-value their own brand like this!? 2. It almost makes sense why Apple can get away with charging a premium. No mystery meat hardware/crapware regardless of retailer.
- emodendroket 8y ago
  Your two observations are connected. They do it because they are paid by the software maker, allowing them to sell the product for less.
  - scarface74 8y ago
    People use to always talk about the “Windows tax” and say that computers would cost less if they didn’t come with Windows. Actually the opposite is true. With all of the deals they can make preinstalling bloat on their computers, OEMs could make more than enough to offset the cost of a Windows license. They couldn’t do that with alternative OS’s.
    - emodendroket 8y ago
      They probably could -- if there were a large demand for Linux laptops, there's no particular reason they couldn't come pre-installed with Linux-based adware.
- acdha 8y ago
  They don’t see it as devaluing — the people who buy the cheapest thing have very little loyalty, and everyone else isn’t buying the cheap, adware-subsidized models anyway. This explains the second part: it’s less that Apple charges a premium than that they don’t enter low-end segments. If you compare them to equivalent quality PCs (Surface, Signature edition, etc.) there’s not much of a difference. Most business buyers understand this so I think the managers making those calls think of the consumer and business lines as almost separate brands, with the latter being both more profitable and longer term, and thus less likely to get nickel and dimed.
  - emodendroket 8y ago
    I think the market is more of a gradient and less of a clear bifurcation between budget and premium. If you are spending around a thousand dollars, you are not getting a top-of-the-line PC and there likely is some less egregious bundled software on it, but it's not bottom-of-the-barrel either.
- scarface74 8y ago
  PC manufacturers lost any perceived brand difference the minute they decided to take marketing dollars from Intel and add an “Intel Inside” sticker on their computers and add it to their ads and when they decided to co Rand with Windows even to the point of including a Windows logo to their keyboards. The only thing most consumers know and care about is that it’s a computer running Windows with an Intel chip.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

AlexandrB 8y ago

Reading something like this I have two thoughts: 1. Why would PC manufacturers de-value their own brand like this!? 2. It almost makes sense why Apple can get away with charging a premium. No mystery meat hardware/crapware regardless of retailer.

emodendroket 8y ago
Your two observations are connected. They do it because they are paid by the software maker, allowing them to sell the product for less.
- scarface74 8y ago
  People use to always talk about the “Windows tax” and say that computers would cost less if they didn’t come with Windows. Actually the opposite is true. With all of the deals they can make preinstalling bloat on their computers, OEMs could make more than enough to offset the cost of a Windows license. They couldn’t do that with alternative OS’s.
  - emodendroket 8y ago
    They probably could -- if there were a large demand for Linux laptops, there's no particular reason they couldn't come pre-installed with Linux-based adware.
acdha 8y ago
They don’t see it as devaluing — the people who buy the cheapest thing have very little loyalty, and everyone else isn’t buying the cheap, adware-subsidized models anyway. This explains the second part: it’s less that Apple charges a premium than that they don’t enter low-end segments. If you compare them to equivalent quality PCs (Surface, Signature edition, etc.) there’s not much of a difference. Most business buyers understand this so I think the managers making those calls think of the consumer and business lines as almost separate brands, with the latter being both more profitable and longer term, and thus less likely to get nickel and dimed.
- emodendroket 8y ago
  I think the market is more of a gradient and less of a clear bifurcation between budget and premium. If you are spending around a thousand dollars, you are not getting a top-of-the-line PC and there likely is some less egregious bundled software on it, but it's not bottom-of-the-barrel either.
scarface74 8y ago
PC manufacturers lost any perceived brand difference the minute they decided to take marketing dollars from Intel and add an “Intel Inside” sticker on their computers and add it to their ads and when they decided to co Rand with Windows even to the point of including a Windows logo to their keyboards. The only thing most consumers know and care about is that it’s a computer running Windows with an Intel chip.